Policy. The Swedish government will vote for the UN resolution to ban nuclear weapons, the Russian minister for foreign affairs Margot Wallström (S) for the TT.
We need kärnvapenparaplyet, say the Liberals, while Moderates warn of a worse relationship with Nato.
It is to vote yes to a UN resolution that aims to launch negotiations next year on a ban on nuclear weapons.
– of course We want to vote yes to it. We believe that this as never before is essential, since we still have 16 000 nuclear weapons in the world. It would be remarkable if Sweden would not be able to stand on the side and with the countries that want to highlight and start to work for reduction of nuclear weapons, ” says Margot Wallström.
That the moderate party believes that the decision to not jeopardise the relationship with Nato and future membership, ” she commented like this:
– I think maybe they should be consistent. So far, they have said that it should not affect the nuclear issue and nedrustningsfrågan. So now, they will probably choose the foot, ” says Wallström.
Qualified double standards
But the Liberals are even harder in his comment.
– Sweden has for a considerable time been under western kärnvapenparaply, and it is my assessment that, right now, in the light of the events of recent weeks and a omvärldsläge more or less in free fall, so we need the kärnvapenparaplyet perhaps more than ever, ” says chairman of the parliamentary defence committee, Allan Widman (L) to TT.
– we will then have a government, with the full knowledge of the Swedish need of national security, that goes out and criticises and opposes it kärnvapenparaply that you are standing in appears to me as a qualified double standards. It won’t win trust. We have a very troubling security situation and it is for the government in the first place should take responsibility, ” says Allan Widman (L).
Calls for analysis
Conservatives on the foreign policy of sweden, Karin Enström express themselves a little more cautious.
– I am looking for, how the internal process has been done in the government offices. Have you done any impact assessment of what this can involve, for example, for relations with our main partners, some of which are Nato countries? And have you done any analysis of the consequences for Sweden’s future freedom of action, for example, in the case of a Nato-membership? she says to TT.
Centre party believes that it is important to combine a nato membership with the work for a nuclear weapons-free world and supports the resolution. KD has not taken a position.
the FACTS
Nuclear weapons
There are currently no agreements banning nuclear weapons in the same way that prohibits, for example, chemical weapons.
There is a non-proliferation agreement (NPT) which means that the nuclear weapon states to not spread nuclear weapons to other countries.
In the 1990s, took the so-called Canberrakommissionen forward a series of proposals for kärnvapenavrustning.
ten years ago, worked a number of experts developed a model nuclear weapons convention (MNWC), which was presented at the united nations.
Some negotiations on this began, however never because of the opposition from some nuclear-weapon states.
The latest initiative from Austria to adopt a UN resolution to initiate negotiations next year on a ban of nuclear weapons.
Source: Swedish physicians against nuclear weapons.
TT
No comments:
Post a Comment